everywoman1

not that the comment isn't relevant, but how on earth did the author think, "hmmmm...an article about local health care facilities' response to the possible swine flu pandemic. Clearly, I will need a quote from the spokesman for Domino's Pizza."

I'm sure that's where Superior Party Store is. Whether there is another party store of the same name where the article says it is...I suppose it's possible, but I doubt it. I do know that friends of mine who live near Harris heard the shots that night, which seems unlikely if all of this did actually take place at Clark near Devon.

Superior Party Store is on MacArthur near Harris, not Clark. It seems that there's something newsworthy happening either there or in the apartments across the street on an almost weekly basis--and it's never good.

Superior Party store is on MacArthur near Harris, not Clark. It seems that there's something newsworthy happening either there or in the apartments across the street on an almost weekly basis--and it's never good.

I3usdriver: Social Security is for people who are retired or have a disability that will last at least a year and keeps them from being able to work enough to reasonably support themselves.

ellaguru: Panhandlers are not representative of people experiencing homelessness. They are often not even homeless. Also, not even close to everyone who is homeless is a thief or an alcoholic. Perhaps you could use your hard-earned income to buy yourself a clue.

Perhaps the guy was looking to spend some of his money while he could and wanted to buy the trailer for his child or something. Why he wanted the trailer is completely irrelevant.

The details aren't in this article that would allow anyone not familiar with the layout to decide whether it the towing company took reasonable precautions to prevent this from happening. If the man had to wander through private property and go through a garage to get to the yard, the towing company may have a leg to stand on here. If, as someone suggested, it would be easy for a child (or really anyone) to wander into the yard unintentionally, then they should absolutely be held accountable.

It's incomprehensible to me why the man is not getting charged with manslaughter. This wasn't a random stranger that he ran over, it was someone who was dating his ex. Even if it was an accident, he's not owning up to it. If the man can be described as a "habitual offender" and has already killed someone at age 28--young for having that kind of record but old enough to know better--I agree with sikoflions, 10 years isn't nearly enough.

hillfan, nice reasoning. It's not always as easy as "go find a job"...the market is inundated with people who are laid off or working jobs they are overqualified for because of the economy, so what chance does someone with a felony record or gaps in employment have?

By the way, hunh, a welfare check and a bridge card are not the same. A bridge card is for food and occasionally a small amount of cash assistance. Most of the people who are "sitting back collecting a check" have been determined to be disabled with a condition that will last at least one year. I'm not saying that no one is getting a free ride, but that's certainly not everybody. There are checks and balances in the system. And before you say it, the bleeding-heart-Ann-Arbor-liberal comeback is getting tired. Try something new for a change...like a well-reasoned argument.

This is not a hovel for criminals. It's a way for blue collar workers and special needs tenants to actually be able to afford living somewhere where they will have access to the bus lines. It's easy for the average AA resident to forget how impossible it is for anyone to live and work outside of the city if they can't afford a car, but then a lack of affordable housing generally makes it impossible to live close to downtown as well. The buses only run until about 6pm on the weekends, and many jobs aren't 9-5 Monday through Friday. Quite the Catch-22.

bptrain, you're close to right. There are 35 male beds and 15 female beds. Next week starts the winter program in which 25 male beds and 6 female beds are added that rotate from church to church. Everyone else stays in chairs in the "warming center," which are the only guaranteed option offered to people who drop in and are certainly not a luxury.

One point I wish the article hit harder is that, being familiar with the way it works at the shelter, I'm sure that the man that was dropped off would have been fine to stay in the warming center if his behavior had been appropriate. They don't check for felonies. The article states that the police got a call from an "unruly suspect." The fact is, he wouldn't have been a suspect yet. The shelter only calls the police if someone is being disruptive AND either refuses to leave on his own or been inappropriate enough to warrant getting trespassed from the building. Thank goodness in this case the man did not get violent until the AAPD arrived, and thank goodness the officers were there when he did.

The point I'm trying to make here is that the Plymouth police did not just drop off a "felon," they dropped off a felon who behaved inappropriately and then became violent when asked to leave.

Thank goodness for both this millage and the county parks millage passing. I've only lived in Washtenaw County for a couple of years, but I'm impressed by how well many individuals in this area consider the big picture. WCC definitely contributes to our community, and I'm glad our community sees fit to continue to support it.

Oh, I forgot. Your point is that those receiving public assistance are getting something they have done nothing to deserve. You don't have to call them leeches, it's certainly implied. You're hiding behind arguments against the boogeymen in Washington because it's less sympathetic to speak out against the actual people affected by the policies you are against.

Your attitude is one that I've seen many before. You try to separate supporting candidates who will decrease funding for public assistance programs from the actual effect it will have on the clients of those programs. Of course you've got nothing against the mentally ill, you just don't want to be forced to support community mental health services. Of course, you also don't want to live in a community where those services aren't readily available, because you certainly don't want a bunch of unpredictable "lunatics" wandering the streets. Quite the quandary.

jvh679, the only one who made this discussion about "jealousy and class warfare" is you.
I hope that you and sdelange never have to go through the demoralizing experience of losing everything and having to depend on public assistance. I fortunately have never been in that position, but I know people from all walks of life and I doubt the same can be said about you.

If you did, however, you would realize that public assistance is necessary. There is no denying that there are those who abuse the system, but that doesn't change the fact that some really do need assistance and will for their entire lives. And no it's not about "chosing not to try." You are (apparently) fortunate enough not to be considered severely mentally ill or physically disabled; if you were, you'd certainly have a different perspective.

Certainly the flaws in the system should be addressed--I'm not any more excited than you are when the government takes a huge chunk of my paycheck for inefficiently run programs that I hope to never need--but don't demonize those who actually need assistance. They are not parasites leeching off of the wealthy, they are people who for whatever reason are currently unable to provide for themselves--and someday they could be your father, your sister, your friend...or even you, no matter how carefully you plan and save.

If the police hadn't done everything they could to stop that woman before she committed vehicular homicide, they would have been partially responsible. In any case, no lives were lost thanks to these quick-thinking officers.

"Sounds like they never did their job to begin with." ManUFan01, you would be just as outraged if you found out they used the taser before force was absolutely necessary.

I personally have watched someone on court-ordered medication get wrestled to the ground and held there until restraints could be put on their hands and feet due to non-compliance with treatment. I've also seen someone tasered simply because they had no way to understand what an officer was telling them to do. It's not pretty, and certainly not the preferred course of action. Thank goodness for the cops who think before they use force.

jvh679, think about your argument before you berate others for theirs. Of course the majority of tax dollars come from those making more money. Let's say I make $250k/year and 20% of that gets taken away for state and federal taxes. That's $50k. Okay, now let's say that I make $25k and %20 is taken away for taxes. That's $5k. So, it takes 10 people making just over minimum wage to equal the tax dollars received from a person or business making a quarter million dollars each year if everything is proportional. Now I know that is overly simplistic and I'm certainly no expert on the economy, but your argument is misleading at best.

During his presidency, Hoover went through many of the same stages as Bush has now, but was unable to take the country out of a downward spiral during the Great Depression. FDR was-- partially due to his willingness to increase the influence of the federal government; an ideology much closer to the current Democratic thinking than the Republican. Lets learn from the past. If nothing else, the current crisis has shown us that economic regulation is necessary right now. I'd rather not have a Republican, maverick or not, who would be forced to carefully balance the traditionally "hands off" approach of his party with the necessary actions to stabilize our economy. Another interesting note on the Great Depression is that one of the reasons there was such a huge federal deficit was a substantial pre-Depression tax cut to the upper class. Something to think about, hmmmm?

As for the 'Stop Obama' bus--the original topic--I think it's a shame and a sad commentary on the all of us that so much attention is focused on negative campaigning. As a country, we're much more focused on slight-of-hand politics than the candidates' actual stance important issues. What I want to know from these demonstrators is why they think McCain would be any better. Don't just tell me not to vote for Obama, tell me why I should vote for McCain!!!